Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 2023 (4) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (4) TMI 1320 - SUPREME COURTCancellation of bail granted - mens rea for committing the crime punishable under Sections 39 and 40 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 - fulfilment of conditions of Section 43D of the said Act - HELD THAT:- The provisions of Section 43D (5) of the said Act have been considered by this Court in the case of Thwaha Fasal [2021 (10) TMI 1430 - SUPREME COURT]. The Court, after reproducing the provisions of Section 43D (5) and after considering the judgment of this Court in the cases of National Investigation Agency v. Zahoor Ahmad Shah Watali [2019 (4) TMI 2023 - SUPREME COURT] and Ranjitsing Brahhmajeetsing Sharma v. State of Maharashtra and Another [2005 (4) TMI 566 - SUPREME COURT], held that while deciding a bail petition filed by the accused against whom offences under Chapter IV and VI of the said Act have been made, the Court has to consider as to whether there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accusation against the accused is prima facie true. The additional requirement, as provided under subsection (5) of Section 43D of the said Act is twin. The first one being that the public prosecutor has to be given an opportunity of being heard. The second one, that the Court is of the opinion that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accusation against such a person is prima facie true. Undisputedly, in the present case, the first requirement has been complied with. Insofar as the second requirement with regard to Court arriving at a satisfaction that the accusation against such persons is prima facie true is concerned, it is not required to go into the elaborate discussion of the evidence, inasmuch as that may hamper the rights of the parties at the stage of trial. A perusal of Sections 39 and 40 of the said Act would itself reveal, that for an act to constitute as an offence within the meaning of that Section, it has to be done with the intention of furthering the activities. This Court, in the case of Thwaha Fasal, while considering the provisions of Section 39 of the said Act, has also taken a similar view. An interference by an Appellate Court and particularly in a matter when liberty granted to a citizen was being taken away would be warranted only in the event the view taken by the Trial Court was either perverse or impossible. The impugned orders are quashed and set aside and the appeals are allowed.
|